DATED: 14.5.2010

The Opposite Party filed a memo stating that the Complainant  has no cause of action to file Complaint, the subject matter of the Complaint already decided before the Hon’ble State Commission hence this Complaint is res-judicata and not maintainable and prayed for hearing on maintainability.

        Heard. Perused the entire records wherein it reveals that since the cause of action and the issues upon facts of the Complaint is already decided in Complaint No.324/2002 on the file of this Hon’ble Forum and the corresponding Appeal No.1052/2009 of the Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangalore dated 7.12.2009.  It could be seen that there was no further appeal against the order before National Commission against the Appeal No.1052/2009 dated 7.12.2009.  Hence the order has become final and issues have been settled as final under Section 24 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986. We have further observed that the father of the minor i.e. Mohitha Giriyappa Gowda subscribed to Chit No.27002/3 for Chit amount of Rs.30,000/-.  It is submitted that he had subscribed to Chit No.38001/5 for Rs.50,000/-, Chit No.58001/11 for Rs.2,00,000/-, Chit No.38001/7 for Rs.50,000/-.  It is stated that those three chits were prized chits and Complainant’s father has drawn money under those chits.  Thereafter, the Complainant father had given Chit No.27001/3 as security for the prized chits.  On default, the amounts lying in the credit of the unprized Chit No.27001/3 adjusted towards the amounts due under the prized chits.  The Complainant i.e. father of the minor Mokshitha filed a Complaint No.324/2002 on the file of this Hon’ble Forum as against the Opposite Parties alleging deficiency of service.  The said Complaint was allowed and the Opposite Party preferred an appeal No.1052/2009 before the Hon’ble State Commission.  In the said appeal, the Hon’ble State Commission passed order dated 7.12.2009 allowing the appeal by considering the Appeal Memo filed by the Opposite Party.  When that being the case, the Complainant cannot very same Complaint in the name of minor representing by his mother who is the natural guardian before this FORA in Complaint No.20/2010.  The principal of res-judicata is applicable in this Complaint and the Complaint is not maintainable.  In view of the above observation, the Complaint heard with regard to the maintainability before proceedings on merits and hereby dismissed as not maintainable.